Australian special forces allegedly killed 39 unarmed Afghans - report

[webfact]

Australian special forces allegedly killed 39 unarmed Afghans - report

By Colin Packham

 

Members of Australia's special forces conduct an exercise during the Australian International Airshow in Melbourne
FILE PHOTO: Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison visits Tokyo

 

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australian special forces allegedly killed 39 unarmed prisoners and civilians in Afghanistan, with senior commandos reportedly forcing junior soldiers to kill defenceless captives in order to "blood" them for combat, a four year investigation found.

 

Australia said on Thursday that 19 current and former soldiers will be referred for potential criminal prosecution for allegedly killing the 39 Afghan locals.

 

Detailing the findings of a long-awaited inquiry into the conduct of special forces personnel in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016, Australia's General Angus John Campbell said there was credible information of 39 unlawful killings by 25 Australian Special Forces personnel in 23 separate incidents.

 

All of those kills were outside the "heat of battle", Campbell said.

 

"These findings allege the most serious breaches of military conduct and professional values," Campbell told reporters in Canberra.

"The unlawful killing, of civilians and prisoners is never acceptable."

 

The report said the majority of those killed, which included prisoners, farmers and other Afghan locals, were captured when they were killed and therefore protected under international law.

 

Following the recommendations of the report, Campbell said 19 current and former members of Australia's military will be referred to a soon-to-be appointed special investigator to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to prosecute.

 

Australia's Minister for Defence Linda Reynolds said last week that Canberra had been advised that local prosecution would negate charges at the International Criminal Court at The Hague.

 

'BLOODING'

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had earlier warned the report would include "difficult and hard news for Australians", but few expected some of the most shocking revelations.

 

While the report was heavily redacted, it included allegations that senior special forces personnel ordered the killing of unarmed Afghans.

 

"There is credible information that junior soldiers were required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner, in order to achieve the soldier’s first kill, in a practice that was known as ‘blooding’," the report read.

 

Once a person had been killed, those allegedly responsible would stage a fight scene with foreign weapons or equipment to justify their action, the report concluded.

 

The actions did not immediately come to light due to what the report concluded was a culture of secrecy and compartmentalisation in which information was kept and controlled within patrols.

 

The veil of secrecy was a key reason that the allegations took so long to come to light.

 

Although it has been the subject of rumour, Australia's official investigation only began after the publication of classified documents about alleged war crimes in Afghanistan.

 

A former military lawyer, David McBride, has been charged with providing the classified papers to the Australian Broadcasting Corp. He admits that he supplied the papers, but says it is in the national interest.

 

The four-year inquiry was conducted by New South Wales state Judge Paul Brereton, who was appointed by the Inspector-General of Defence in 2016 to investigate rumours of war crimes in Afghanistan between 2003 and 2016.

 

The inquiry examined more than 20,000 documents and 25,000 images, and interviewed 423 witnesses under oath.

 

The report recommended Canberra should compensate victims' families even without a successful prosecution.

 

Campbell said he would seek to revoke citations for special operations task groups that served in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2013.

The release of the report came after Morrison spoke with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.

 

"The Prime Minister of Australia expressed his deepest sorrow over the misconduct by some Australian troops in Afghanistan," Ghani's office wrote on Twitter.

 

Australia has had troops in Afghanistan since 2002 as part of the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Taliban militia.

 

Australia has about 1,500 troops remaining in Afghanistan.

 

(Reporting by Colin Packham in Sydney; Editing by Matthew Lewis, Stephen Coates and Michael Perry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-11-20

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Jack Mountain]

On this scale it's not only the foot soldiers who are to blame (wipe them anyway) but also their higher placed colleagues ...

[ezzra]

Jus to show you that even countries with squeaky clean image of rules of engagements and honorable behavior and conduct are not without a blemish... and oh boy, what a blemish, enough to tarnish Aussie forces name for generations to come...

[Scott]

Off-topic, racist, troll posts and replies reported and removed.   Continue and face a suspension. 

 

[simple1]

Australian SAS in Afghanistan had been recognised as the best of the best by NATO commanders. Announcement of war crimes prosecutions in the coming years, is a major blow to the prestige of Australian armed forces.

 

Cold bloodied murder of unarmed POW and civilians (so called 'blooding' of new recruits) by Oz SF in Afghanistan has been front page news here in Oz for a few days. The SAS squadron mainly responsible for the murders has been disbanded and removed from the military order of battle - all those who served (approx 3000) have to hand in their awards for service in Afghanistan.

[nausea]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

 

"There is credible information that junior soldiers were required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner, in order to achieve the soldier’s first kill, in a practice that was known as ‘blooding’," the report read.

Reminds me of the "kill the dog" test for recruits in Kingsman and Dog Soldiers. Scary to think that fiction can (allegedly) be reality, in fact a lot worse, given that human victims are involved. I wonder if anyone refused, and what happened to them if they did. I must admit, I thought these guys were trained to think for themselves and take the initiative rather than follow orders blindly. Yeah, I can understand the pressure on junior soldiers to conform, the Stanstead prison experiment and Milgram's experiment on obedience to authority, spring to mind, but the former has been debunked to a certain extent, and in the latter, 35% refused to go the whole lethal hog. Incidentally, the topic of special forces came up casually in a conversation I had with an Australian guy some years ago, and instead of the stereotypical response I was expecting on how tough, etc., they were, he surprised me by simply calling them trained killers, in a disdainful tone.

[Rookiescot]

Absolutely astonished at this. Australian forces have always been disciplined and highly effective soldiers in my experience. 

How this breakdown in discipline was allowed to happen and indeed it seems, flourish, is  the responsibility of the officers and NCO's. 

It should never happen in professional western forces. Isolated incidents do occur. You're in a war zone after all. But orchestrated behavior like this is inexcusable.

I hope the situation is resolved very quickly and the thousands of decent, good quality, professional and competent diggers will not be tarnished by this rogue group.  

[thaibeachlovers]

25 minutes ago, nausea said:

Incidentally, the topic of special forces came up casually in a conversation I had with an Australian guy some years ago, and instead of the stereotypical response I was expecting on how tough, etc., they were, he surprised me by simply calling them trained killers, in a disdainful tone.

I was in the forces and we were all trained killers, even if we never went near a war. What else would we have been? We were not trained to be social workers.

 

How nice to be disdainful of men sent to do a job that most would never do. Isn't there a saying about how soldiers are never appreciated till the enemy is at the gates?

[Bluetongue]

It does seem very bad. There is one court case already underway, where an apparently unarmed local national passed by a couple of concealed troopers, their NCO came up believed he was a spotter for a group of Taliban who would compromise their position and shot him, his body was not searched and the situation turned into a firefight. I will follow the court cases and allow the system to decide I think. 

[FritsSikkink]

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I was in the forces and we were all trained killers, even if we never went near a war. What else would we have been? We were not trained to be social workers.

 

How nice to be disdainful of men sent to do a job that most would never do. Isn't there a saying about how soldiers are never appreciated till the enemy is at the gates?

Killing unarmed people in custody is murder. Your war in Afghanistan is to acquire the billions worth of minerals. The enemies aren't at your gates, they are thousands of miles outside your country. Your country is creating wars all over the world to enrich themselves. 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Killing unarmed people in custody is murder. Your war in Afghanistan is to acquire the billions worth of minerals. The enemies aren't at your gates, they are thousands of miles outside your country. Your country is creating wars all over the world to enrich themselves. 

Why do you assume I'm an American?

[Grumpy one]

How many were killed by others during war

This is no different from bombing London in WW2

No doubt the US has a high innocents kill rate

It happens, live with it

[simple1]

28 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I was in the forces and we were all trained killers, even if we never went near a war. What else would we have been? We were not trained to be social workers.

 

How nice to be disdainful of men sent to do a job that most would never do. Isn't there a saying about how soldiers are never appreciated till the enemy is at the gates?

 

It is alleged the murders were ordered by non commissioned officers to 'bloody' those who had yet to kill. The killings did not occur during the 'heat of battle', but of those captured and restrained as well as civilians, including two fourteen year old boys whose throats were cut and then thrown into a river. Would be interesting to know if you would have followed orders to murder non combatants in order to be 'bloodied'.

[Sujo]

4 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

How many were killed by others during war

This is no different from bombing London in WW2

No doubt the US has a high innocents kill rate

It happens, live with it

Its plain murder, yes they will be living with it in jail.

[Grumpy one]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Its plain murder, yes they will be living with it in jail.

I assume no one has ever shot at you

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, Grumpy one said:

I assume no one has ever shot at you

It's always different from the safety of one's room far away from the fighting.

[simple1]

4 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

How many were killed by others during war

This is no different from bombing London in WW2

No doubt the US has a high innocents kill rate

It happens, live with it

 

Very different; one on one killings by highly trained SF whilst not engaged in combat. A severe breakdown in command, culture and ethics as identified by the enquiry.

[Grumpy one]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

It's always different from the safety of one's room far away from the fighting.

I spent 5 years in the BSAP, us Rhodies know what fighting is, do you

[simple1]

4 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

I assume no one has ever shot at you

Try reading the OP:

 

 senior commandos reportedly forcing junior soldiers to kill defenceless captives in order to "blood" them for combat, a four year investigation found.

[thaibeachlovers]

The headline says ALLEGEDLY, so why do some on here assume it was murder?

[FritsSikkink]

33 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why do you assume I'm an American?

Because you told the forum you went back to the states

Edited November 20, 2020 by FritsSikkink

[RJRS1301]

40 minutes ago, Bluetongue said:

It does seem very bad. There is one court case already underway, where an apparently unarmed local national passed by a couple of concealed troopers, their NCO came up believed he was a spotter for a group of Taliban who would compromise their position and shot him, his body was not searched and the situation turned into a firefight. I will follow the court cases and allow the system to decide I think. 

Those named in the reports, will now be referred for further investigation and possible prosecution, however this report took four years, and it could be a decade before any criminal prosecutions begin.

 

[FritsSikkink]

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The headline says ALLEGEDLY, so why do some on here assume it was murder?

Maybe because:

"Detailing the findings of a long-awaited inquiry into the conduct of special forces personnel in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016, Australia's General Angus John Campbell said there was credible information of 39 unlawful killings by 25 Australian Special Forces personnel in 23 separate incidents." 

Edited November 20, 2020 by FritsSikkink

[FritsSikkink]

22 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's always different from the safety of one's room far away from the fighting.

How many fights did you have in your life?

[simple1]

2 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Those named in the reports, will now be referred for further investigation and possible prosecution, however this report took four years, and it could be a decade before any criminal prosecutions begin.

 

 

Local media are claiming could take up to ten years to finalise Court proceedings - not a good look for anyone

[RJRS1301]

39 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

How many were killed by others during war

This is no different from bombing London in WW2

No doubt the US has a high innocents kill rate

It happens, live with it

Shooting of persons under "control" is very different.

International rules govern the conduct of troops following placing a person "under control"

Shooting of POWs is considerd a war crime, which is why there was a four years of investigation and now referrals for further investigation and possible prosecutions.

 

Edited November 20, 2020 by RJRS1301

[RJRS1301]

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

 

Local media are claiming could take up to ten years to finalise Court proceedings - not a good look for anyone

The cases need to be fully investigated by prosecutions, evidence needs to gathered, briefs written,.

taking of evidence in Afghanistan and getting that evidence reliably and accurately recorded and translated, finding witnesses and then arranging for them to give evidence under a system culturally very different will be a mamoth task

[Sujo]

31 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

I spent 5 years in the BSAP, us Rhodies know what fighting is, do you

How many unarmed innocents did you kill.

[Sujo]

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's always different from the safety of one's room far away from the fighting.

They werent fighting. The ADF disagrees with you.

 

War crimes are not acceptable.

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The headline says ALLEGEDLY, so why do some on here assume it was murder?

I can think of a number of stomach turning injustices in this report, referring to the unlawful killing by trained and disciplined soldiers of unarmed prisoners and civilians as ‘murder’ is not one of them.